Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 13:12:47 -0500 From: "Benjamin Greenwald" <beng@lcs.mit.edu> To: "Nate Williams" <nate@mt.sri.com>, "Michael Robinson" <robinson@netrinsics.com> Cc: <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Naming branches Message-ID: <199902061812.NAA24874@miris.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <199902061747.KAA16745@mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
My point is this: I moved from 3.0-current to 3.0-stable at the time of the branch. My machine doesn't crash any less since the move. In fact, I didn't buildworld in the last couple of weeks before the branch and now my machine crashes more often. By calling the branch -stable, whether we intend to or not, we are making a statement about both the robustness of the code and the ease of use. In the case of 3.0-stable, I think we can all agree the upgrade path has been less than smooth and the code is far less robust than 2.2-stable. I think a lot of the people who are having trouble upgrading from 2.2-stable to 3.0-stable are simply poorly informed of these facts. By puting a new release branch in a probationary period, people may be less likely to become early adopters. As a result, they are less inconvienenced and the early adopters will be less annoyied by the constant stream of questions, which although the answers are documented (/usr/src/UPDATING), they are documented in a place which didn't exist previously and we can't really expect them to know about. It comes down to the poor guy who's machine no longer boots. If he'd been installing 3.0-development, then he really has no one but himself to blame. By installing 3.0-stable, he has a rightful expectation that this shouldn't have happended, and if you ask me, he has every right to be angry. -Ben -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Nate Williams Sent: Saturday, February 06, 1999 12:48 PM To: Michael Robinson Cc: beng@lcs.mit.edu; jkh@zippy.cdrom.com; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Naming branches > "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> wrote: > >It works fine out of the box. > > With the caveat that the PCCARD support is a big step backwards from > PAO-2.2.8. In that it doesnt' crash the system when you suspend/resume it like PAO does? Seems a step forward to me.... Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199902061812.NAA24874>